a
justice which can be vindicated in holding self-denial to be a standard
of motive. All developed religions have demanded the renunciation of
what is dearest. The Ynglyngasaga tells us that in a time of famine, the
first sacrifice offered to the gods was of beasts only; if this failed,
men were slain to appease them; and if this did not mitigate their
anger, the king himself was obliged to die that they might send plenty.
The Latin writers have handed it down that among the Germans and Gauls a
human sacrifice was deemed the more efficacious the more distinguished
the victim, and the nearer his relationship to him who offered the
rite.[219-1] The slaughter of children and wives to please the gods was
common in many religions, and the self-emasculation of the priests of
Cybele, with other such painful rites, indicates that the measure of the
sacrifice was very usually not what the god needed, but the willingness
of the worshipper to give.

The second idea, that of _specific performance_, has been well expressed
and humorously commented upon by Hume in his _Natural History of
Religions_. He says: "Here I cannot forbear observing a fact which may
be worth the attention of those who make human nature the object of
their inquiry. It is certain that in every religion, many of the
votaries, perhaps the greatest number, will seek the divine favor, not
by virtue and good morals, but either by frivolous observances, by
intemperate zeal, by rapturous ecstasies, or by the belief of mysterious
and absurd opinions.

* * * In all this [_i. e._, in virtue and good morals], a superstitious
man finds nothing, which he has properly performed for the sake of his
deity, or which can peculiarly recommend him to divine favor and
protection. * * * * But if he fast or give himself a sound whipping,
this has a direct reference, in his opinion, to the service of God. No
other motive could engage him to such austerities."

The philosopher here sets forth in his inimitable style a marked
characteristic of religious acts. But he touches upon it with his usual
superficiality. It is true that no religion has ever been content with
promoting the happiness of man, and that the vast majority of votaries
are always seeking to do something specifically religious, and are not
satisfied with the moral only. The simple explanation of it is that the
religious sentiment has a purpose entirely distinct from ethics, a
purpose constantly felt as something pecu